The applicant moved under Rule 12(6) of the Family Law Rules to split his request for a divorce from the other issues in the case.
The respondent opposed the motion, arguing that a Canadian divorce would prejudice her ability to pursue property claims against the applicant in India.
The respondent relied on an unsworn letter from an Indian lawyer as expert evidence of foreign law.
The court found the letter inadmissible as expert evidence due to a lack of qualifications and explanation.
However, to deal with the case justly, the court adjourned the motion to allow both parties to obtain and present admissible expert evidence regarding Indian law.
